<p>Academically, how do schools like Emma Willard and Miss Porter's compare to the top coed boarding schools? Are they equivalent to Andover/Exeter or are they more like St. Georges or Peddie or what? </p>
<p>Thanks! :)</p>
<p>I was actually just going to ask that question! Thanks PurpoisePal.</p>
<p>"Are they equivalent to Andover/Exeter or are they more like St. Georges or Peddie or what? "
i think they are more like the Hill, loomis. peddie level ..at least that's the general perception in the BS student circle.</p>
<p>Miss Porters, Emma Willard, and Westover are much smaller than Andover/Exeter. That means there are fewer courses which is the biggest difference academically. They all have the same smaller class size, dedicated teachers, challenging courses, leadership opportunities, and supportive environments.</p>
<p>they are not close to being as selective when it comes to admissions ..that too</p>
<p>There is a difference, bearcats. Only girls apply which reduces the pool automatically. Yes, they accept a higher percentage of applicants from the smaller pool!</p>
<p>well that's the point. A smaller pool makes the schools less capable of being as selective and "picking on each applicant" as much as they want...that might (i emphasize, MIGHT) therefore lower the overall admitted pool quality and thus, the admissions criteria might be lowered. Miss Porter's average SSAT is 70th percentile. That's a lot lower than most of the top tier BS like andover, exeter, SPS, hotchkiss, choate and lawrenceville.</p>
<p>also, note that miss porter's student-teacher ratio is 8:1, which is comparatively higher than most top tier BS.</p>
<p>Yes, the pool is smaller, but so is the school, so that should even out. If you check out the trend, the smaller ones of the top tier boarding school tend to have a lower admit rate, hotchkiss and deerfield both scored a <=20% admit rate this year and last year while andover and exeter's admit rate hover between 20%-25%, that's becoz hotchkiss and deerfield are smaller.
And given that emma and porter are both even much smaller, that would compensate the smaller pool.</p>
<p>I am not trying to bash on emma and porter, but just showing that they are not the same breed as andover, exeter, choate and such....but i m sure you can get an excellent education there, and sometimes even a better fit</p>
<p>bearcats, didn't you have a problem when I pointed out that the tt nyc day schools had an admit ratio of 20:1, but the top boarding schools have a ratio of only 5:1? This info didn't seem to mean much to you. I think I'm seeing a little hypocrisy....</p>
<p>I guess you're right, bearcats, if you automatically equate "admitted pool QUALITY" with the objective stats of the admitted students (as many, many people on CC seem to do). But, "quality" is just the point that gets overlooked so much on this board....and it absolutely involves much, much more than test scores.I'm sure you never intended to imply that the "quality" of a student equates to that student's SSAT score, but these discussions almost alway devolve into comparisons of SSAT scores, and I hate that inevitably someone will use the word "quality" to refer to an applicant/admittee pool whose average SSAT percentile is above 90%. </p>
<p>An academic environment like that offered at all-girls' schools offers opportunities for hard work, challenging courses, wonderful instructors in a generally happy, collaborative environment that doesn't make competition the focus. in short, an excellent education. I know that they are NOT right for every girl, but they are places where the focus is on producing strong, intellectually curious women who don't equate quality with test scores. </p>
<p>I also recognize that those who choose Exeter/Andover, et al., do so for their own valid reasons, and that's great. Girls schools are VERY different from the coeds in many ways, so if you're interested in them, you should know that.</p>
<p>But, I also know that I'm the outsider here who truly does not believe that being smart equals quality but instead is just a chance for a person to use that intelligence to help others. </p>
<p>I am not trying to bash Exeter, Andover, etc., but just stating that, thank god, the girls' schools are not the same breed - but I'm sure that students can get an excellent education at Exeter/Andover, etc., and sometimes even a better fit.</p>
<p>re NYC: becoz now we are comparing boarding schools to boarding schools. </p>
<p>Day schools and boarding schools have different applicant pools in terms of demographics and self selectivities, but boarding schools draw from the same pool. That's why they are comparable.</p>
<p>i think i also pointed out the faculty/student ratio...that's speaks for the amount of resources the school puts in the education.</p>
<p>and now that you mentioned it</p>
<p>From peterson's</p>
<p>brearly NY, NY
Acceptance Rate
23% of students who applied were admitted</p>
<p>Trinity NY, NY
Acceptance Rate
25% of students who applied were admitted</p>
<p>Collegiate
Acceptance Rate
44% of students who applied were admitted</p>
<p>I dont know where you find the 20:1 statistics, maybe you can point me to some source?</p>
<p>From peterson's</p>
<p>Hotchkiss 20%</p>
<p>Deerfield 16%</p>
<p>St paul's 19%</p>
<p>NY Magazine google it. Your numbers are absurd. Where did you get that?</p>
<p>bearcats, your peterson's source is completely outdated. They don't even have the current head of schools correct. Check recent sources.</p>
<p>"Last updated: 03/12/2007."</p>
<p>So why are most of the heads of schools wrong. For example the head mistress they listed for Chapin, hasn't been there for 4 or 5 years.</p>
<p>The OP asked how do academics differ between Emma Willard/Miss Porters and Andover/Exeter. Perhaps if we could stay on point we would avoid these endless discussions of which schools are more selective!</p>
<p>Well then!!</p>
<p>The girls schools compare, but the co-ed ones, because they appeal to a wider range of students, are thus are more selective (and have more resource). But the all-girl boarding schools offer a nice community and I think that schools like Emma Willard (founded by none other than Emma Willard herself) and Miss Porter's really develop strong women.</p>
<p>Again, what does selectivity have to do with getting a great education?</p>
<p>Sometime ago i read an article about bs that I believe was provided by hazmat. there was some concern that the larger bs were not teaching their students the basics because the kids were taking courses that were of interest to them. The smaller bs were thought to provide a better foundation because they had less course offerings. And yes the two schools where they observed some holes in their education ......A and E. I'm the messenger smile</p>